| Author | Message | ||
| Nowisee Registered user Username: Nowisee Post Number: 975 Registered: 5-2009 |
Had the chance to get some brochures yesterday for "The Bible Story" books. (Well, it did say "take one"...I assumed they meant take one display  , so of course I obediently followed the instructions.) Anyway, after reading the brochure, the customer would be more than willing to send in for the books. They are described as "The most complete and accurate set of Bible stories you can find for your children"....and "no other Bible story books show children so much of the Bible!"....There are 4 endorsements: One by "A Lutheran Pastor", one by "A Methodist Minister", "An Evangelical Minister", and last but not least "A Letter From a Catholic Diocese". No names given at all. Does anyone else find it weird and deceptive that the SDAs would use endorsements from those they consider the "harlot of Babylon" and the "daughters of the harlot" to sell their books? The brochure also offers "The Bible Story for Adults", described as a Bible reference library. No names given, but there is a tiny photograph of the adult books. Getting out my magnifying glass I was able to hold the brochure under a strong light andy make out the names on the volumes. Three guesses what they are? The entire "Conflict of the Ages" series plus "Bible Readings For the Home"! G-r-r-r! This is written to appeal to Christians....shame, shame, shame. | ||
| Thegoldenway Registered user Username: Thegoldenway Post Number: 193 Registered: 5-2011 |
I was an LE for one summer a few years ago. I had a very hard time doing it. I found it to be so deceptive. Even when I was a SDA I didn't like being deceptive like that. I did it for about three months and then God 'gave' me two part time jobs to get me out of it. They happened to be the only jobs I ever had in my entire life that I never filled out a job app for. They were my 'God given' jobs lynn | ||
| Kelleigh Registered user Username: Kelleigh Post Number: 192 Registered: 7-2011  |
Nowisee, you have me in stitches, "...Well, it did say "take one"...I assumed they meant take one display" Too funny! Now all you need a good shredding machine! "There are 4 endorsements: One by "A Lutheran Pastor", one by "A Methodist Minister", "An Evangelical Minister", and last but not least "A Letter From a Catholic Diocese". No names given at all". Now I need something to prop up my gaping jaw! The Bible Story Vol 1 "He blessed the Sabbath so it would be a blessing to them. He set it apart as a holy day not for Himself, but for them [Adam and Eve]. Even now six thousand years later, all who keep the seventh day holy, find a blessing in it that others never know!" ...and they say a Lutheran, Methodist etc endorsed this series? Not likely. | ||
| Trans4mer Registered user Username: Trans4mer Post Number: 38 Registered: 9-2011  |
Kelleigh, yea, that's what typical adventers do, is hold back their 'real beliefs', trojan horse style. This has been their SOP for as long as I can recall. I suppose we should applaud for the sales pitch in the fine print. Or not. I just heard the ghastly news from my twisted son, bragging that my grandson went forward to join in what we now see as a cult. I'm afraid he'll eventually become a cynical, bitter, arrogant jihadist like my son. What a nauseating situation. My daughter and I both just avoid his dark insinuations if possible. I trying to establish with him a 'no fly zone' with a warning that I'll counter strike or just hang up. I'm getting to where I hardly stand to be around him. | ||
| Asurprise Registered user Username: Asurprise Post Number: 2215 Registered: 7-2007 |
There are a lot of Christians who don't know that the SDA church is a false church. They just assume that the SDAs are simply another Christian church with some peculiar ideas. As for the Roman Catholic endorsement, they were simply endorsing another religion very similar to their own - a religion adding human WORKS to Jesus finished work. Funny that the SDA church recognizes the RCC as a cult but not their own religion.... | ||
| Bskillet Registered user Username: Bskillet Post Number: 891 Registered: 8-2008 |
I'm guessing they just made this up, just like Ellen White made up all of those "I was shown" statements. | ||
| Nowisee Registered user Username: Nowisee Post Number: 976 Registered: 5-2009 |
That was my feeling, too Bskillet. If the endorsers were not ashamed of their endorsements, why not proudly give their names on the brochure? | ||
| Kelleigh Registered user Username: Kelleigh Post Number: 194 Registered: 7-2011 |
Trans4mer, these situations with family can be really tough. Setting boundaries with your son sounds like a good idea. Fathers need a break sometimes! Praying for you. | ||
| Jim02 Registered user Username: Jim02 Post Number: 1394 Registered: 5-2007 |
In general, I have often questioned the practice of withholding information until later about the SDA books, magazines and seminars. I know why they justify it, at least in part. Because people have elements of prejudice taht would preempt recieveing new information. Their minds would be closed to anything other than what they already know. Yes , this is a two edge sword. If I close my mind, I have imortalized and capped my knowledge to any further revealation from God through the ministries available. They , I suspect, feel that they are prejudged and will not recieve a hearing of they say they are SDA upfront. Jesus withheld information from His disciples because they could not bear it. Is withholding their identity dishonest. Overall, I am inclined to conclude it is. If they are proud of their message and are fully confident in it and their name. Then they should not be ashamed of their indentity. But like so many other things in the leadership of the SDA. It seems someone in authority, on some pretense or another continues a policy (tradition) that most rank and file would not agree with. | ||
| Asurprise Registered user Username: Asurprise Post Number: 2220 Registered: 7-2007 |
Jesus was upfront with His disciples about that. He told them they "couldn't bear it." He told them the Holy Spirit would reveal all things to them. It's like trying to tell a three year old about sex. (Of course now our liberal society wants to teach kindergarteners about sex, but they want to teach them about all the evil perversions as well and teach them it's okay.) So Jesus was never deceptive. He was upfront with everything. If the SDA church were upfront about their "prophet," would people want to join? People who don't really know what the Bible says, can be easily led, step by step into the SDA church. When I was an SDA, I thought it was perfectly okay to be a little deceptive in order for people to find the "truth." From the devil's point of view, the SDA method is brilliant! First hold meetings in some neutral place so that people don't have a clue which church is putting them on. Then start with the true prophecies in Daniel, gradually working into the SDA lies. People who don't REALLY KNOW what the Bible says will easily fall for the lies! (I had no idea when I was trying to deceive people into the "truth" that I was really deceiving people into a big horrible lie that would keep them from being saved! I even tried to do that to my boyfriend. He and I attended one meeting and he didn't like it.) Anyway that way the devil can deceive a whole lot of people into never really accepting Jesus' gift for them.  | ||
| Jim02 Registered user Username: Jim02 Post Number: 1396 Registered: 5-2007 |
Asurprise, I agree, Jesus was NOT deceptive even though He revealed things in progression. The SDA (I suspect) rationalize their withholding information so as to justify it on some level. I do agree, they should be upfront. Your latter observation about step by step starting with basic truth then introducing new ideas or as you say lies is where this whole mission evolves. Detecting what the truth actually is. Reductionism attempts to suggest that the Bible is essentially simple and it's truths plain to receive. In the end, hopefully , that will be true. But as we can all testify to, slipping into error is easy to do and complex to escape. | ||
| Butterfly_poette Registered user Username: Butterfly_poette Post Number: 95 Registered: 5-2011 |
I find it sad that SDAs are getting other denominations to endorse their materials. | ||
| Lucybugg Registered user Username: Lucybugg Post Number: 304 Registered: 2-2007 |
When we started attending our "new" church we were very upfront about being formers. Since then, we've been educating them about sda. Most thought sda were just like everyone else with a few more restrictions such as dietary and the sabbath. I think the sda lied when saying certain denominational pastors endorsed those books. Any pastor who read those books would recognize the heresy contained therein. | ||
| Skeeter Registered user Username: Skeeter Post Number: 1689 Registered: 12-2007  |
It would be interesting to know how many decades those books have been using the same "endorsements". Knowing now how SDA's "twist" things.... at the time they got the "endorsements" if indeed they did.... they most probably went to those people with a line such as.... 'we are putting together a series of childrens books to make the Bible come alive for children. Do you agree that this is a good idea ? ' and the poor gullible people didnt realize they had been slickered right into endorsing "Bible" stories that actually promote SDA doctrine. Just my take on it. | ||
| Goose Registered user Username: Goose Post Number: 3 Registered: 11-2011  |
Nowisee wrote: "If the endorsers were not ashamed of their endorsements, why not proudly give their names on the brochure?" It's because they lied. Absolutely. Saying "a Methodist pastor" or "Lutheran Pastor" could be anybody. They could not be sued for misrepresentation. Children's books, featured under the guise of a lie. Unconscionable. Sometimes I'm glad God gave me the experience of being an Adventist. It eventually made me really hungry for the Truth, that is Jesus. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 13118 Registered: 12-2003  |
I agree. I am thankful to God, now, that I grew up Adventist. There are things about the Bible and salvation that I think I understand better because I had to study my way out of a false worldview...things like the new covenant, for instance. I think a lot of Christians don't really understand it in detail because they've always known the real Jesus and the miracle of His finished work. But WE had to figure out what happened to Sabbath...and the new covenant is what that close Bible study revealed! I'm so thankful for how God redeems our past! Colleen | ||
| Thegoldenway Registered user Username: Thegoldenway Post Number: 210 Registered: 5-2011 |
I am too, Colleen. I can now see how God turned my SDA experience/life into a blessing. Like you, I know that I have a deeper appreciation and understanding of the NC and of the true Sabbath (Jesus) and of salvation...the gospel having come out of SDAism, than most other christians who have never been involved in SDAism. It's crazy, but I have actually come to the place of thanking God for my SDA past. I realize that what I have 'today' stems from what I was involved in "yesterday'. And what I have 'today' is nothing short of beautiful! Thank you Jesus! lynn | ||
| Bobalou Registered user Username: Bobalou Post Number: 84 Registered: 2-2005 |
I do not believe God led me to falsehood in order to later teach me the truth. I am responsible, God gave me my brain to seek wisdom. I failed to dig deep enough and relied on the brainwashed members to woo me into the deep dungeon of the SDA church. I do believe that I appreciate the real truth more than I would have if I had stayed in the church I was in. |
